Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@amd.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2024 1:34 AM
> To: Suanming Mou <suanmi...@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam <or...@nvidia.com>;
> Aman Singh <aman.deep.si...@intel.com>; Yuying Zhang
> <yuying.zh...@intel.com>; NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)
> <tho...@monjalon.net>; Andrew Rybchenko
> <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] ethdev: add compare item
>
> On 1/15/2024 9:13 AM, Suanming Mou wrote:
> > The new item type is added for the case user wants to match traffic
> > based on packet field compare result with other fields or immediate
> > value.
> >
> > e.g. take advantage the compare item user will be able to accumulate a
> > IPv4/TCP packet's TCP data_offset and IPv4 IHL field to a tag
> > register, then compare the tag register with IPv4 header total length
> > to understand the packet has payload or not.
> >
>
> ack, above sample makes it easier to understand.
>
> This patch is adding testpmd commands, can you please provide some sample
> commands in commit log?
> The more samples are better, as far as I remember there was a testpmd
> documentation that documents the sample usages, can you please check for it?
Yes, I think we have something to do in "testpmd_funcs.rst", will update.
>
> > The supported operations can be as below:
> > - RTE_FLOW_ITEM_COMPARE_EQ (equal)
> > - RTE_FLOW_ITEM_COMPARE_NE (not equal)
> > - RTE_FLOW_ITEM_COMPARE_LT (less than)
> > - RTE_FLOW_ITEM_COMPARE_LE (less than or equal)
> > - RTE_FLOW_ITEM_COMPARE_GT (great than)
> > - RTE_FLOW_ITEM_COMPARE_GE (great than or equal)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suanming Mou <suanmi...@nvidia.com>
> > Acked-by: Ori Kam <or...@nvidia.com>
> > Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>
>
> <...>
>
> >
> > -static const char *const modify_field_ids[] = {
> > +static const char *const flow_field_ids[] = {
> >
>
> I wonder if this rename should be in previous patch, as it does the logical
> change
> of the modify action specific fields to more generic fields.
Agree, will adjust.
>
> <...>
>
> > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_24_03.rst
> > b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_24_03.rst
> > index a691e794f4..8c8c661218 100644
> > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_24_03.rst
> > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_24_03.rst
> > @@ -55,6 +55,11 @@ New Features
> > Also, make sure to start the actual text at the margin.
> > =======================================================
> >
> > +* **Added compare flow matching criteria.**
> > +
> > + Added ``RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_COMPARE`` to allow matching on compare
> > + result between the packet fields or value.
> > +
> > * **Updated NVIDIA mlx5 driver.**
> >
> > * Added support for accumulating from src field to dst field.
> >
>
> I guess you are rebasing on some internal repo, because above NVIDIA note
> doesn't exist in upstream repo. Can you please rebase on latest next-net,
> this also
> helps to resolve conflict with random action in upstream repo.
Will rebase and update.
>
> <...>
>
> > +/**
> > + * Field IDs for packet field.
> > + */
> > +enum rte_flow_field_id {
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_START = 0, /**< Start of a packet. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_MAC_DST, /**< Destination MAC Address.
> */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_MAC_SRC, /**< Source MAC Address. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VLAN_TYPE, /**< VLAN Tag Identifier. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VLAN_ID, /**< VLAN Identifier. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_MAC_TYPE, /**< EtherType. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV4_DSCP, /**< IPv4 DSCP. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV4_TTL, /**< IPv4 Time To Live. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV4_SRC, /**< IPv4 Source Address. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV4_DST, /**< IPv4 Destination Address. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV6_DSCP, /**< IPv6 DSCP. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV6_HOPLIMIT, /**< IPv6 Hop Limit. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV6_SRC, /**< IPv6 Source Address. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV6_DST, /**< IPv6 Destination Address. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_TCP_PORT_SRC, /**< TCP Source Port Number.
> */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_TCP_PORT_DST, /**< TCP Destination Port
> Number. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_TCP_SEQ_NUM, /**< TCP Sequence Number. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_TCP_ACK_NUM, /**< TCP Acknowledgment
> Number. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_TCP_FLAGS, /**< TCP Flags. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_UDP_PORT_SRC, /**< UDP Source Port Number.
> */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_UDP_PORT_DST, /**< UDP Destination Port
> Number. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VXLAN_VNI, /**< VXLAN Network Identifier. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_GENEVE_VNI, /**< GENEVE Network
> Identifier. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_GTP_TEID, /**< GTP Tunnel Endpoint Identifier. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_TAG, /**< Tag value. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_MARK, /**< Mark value. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_META, /**< Metadata value. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_POINTER, /**< Memory pointer. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VALUE, /**< Immediate value. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV4_ECN, /**< IPv4 ECN. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV6_ECN, /**< IPv6 ECN. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_GTP_PSC_QFI, /**< GTP QFI. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_METER_COLOR, /**< Meter color marker. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV6_PROTO, /**< IPv6 next header. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_FLEX_ITEM, /**< Flex item. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_HASH_RESULT, /**< Hash result. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_GENEVE_OPT_TYPE, /**< GENEVE option type. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_GENEVE_OPT_CLASS,/**< GENEVE option class. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_GENEVE_OPT_DATA, /**< GENEVE option data. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_MPLS, /**< MPLS header. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_TCP_DATA_OFFSET, /**< TCP data offset. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV4_IHL, /**< IPv4 IHL. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV4_TOTAL_LEN, /**< IPv4 total length. */
> > + RTE_FLOW_FIELD_IPV6_PAYLOAD_LEN /**< IPv6 payload length. */
> > +};
> > +
>
> +1 to move the structs to keep the proper order, but not sure if it is
> better to do this in previous patch or this one.
The previous patch is just for renaming, I assume moving the struct is too much
in previous patch, what do you think?
>
> > +/**
> > + * @warning
> > + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this structure may change without prior notice
> > + *
> > + * Field description for packet field.
> > + */
> > +struct rte_flow_field_data {
> > + enum rte_flow_field_id field; /**< Field or memory type ID. */
> > + union {
> > + struct {
> > + /** Encapsulation level and tag index or flex item
> handle. */
> > + union {
> > + struct {
> > + /**
> > + * Packet encapsulation level containing
> > + * the field to modify.
> > + *
> > + * - @p 0 requests the default behavior.
> > + * Depending on the packet type, it
> > + * can mean outermost, innermost or
> > + * anything in between.
> > + *
> > + * It basically stands for the
> > + * innermost encapsulation level.
> > + * Modification can be performed
> > + * according to PMD and device
> > + * capabilities.
> > + *
> > + * - @p 1 requests modification to be
> > + * performed on the outermost packet
> > + * encapsulation level.
> > + *
> > + * - @p 2 and subsequent values
> request
> > + * modification to be performed on
> > + * the specified inner packet
> > + * encapsulation level, from
> > + * outermost to innermost (lower to
> > + * higher values).
> > + *
> > + * Values other than @p 0 are not
> > + * necessarily supported.
> > + *
> > + * @note that for MPLS field,
> > + * encapsulation level also include
> > + * tunnel since MPLS may appear in
> > + * outer, inner or tunnel.
> > + */
> > + uint8_t level;
> > + union {
> > + /**
> > + * Tag index array inside
> > + * encapsulation level.
> > + * Used for VLAN, MPLS or TAG
> types.
> > + */
> > + uint8_t tag_index;
> > + /**
> > + * Geneve option identifier.
> > + * Relevant only for
> > + *
> RTE_FLOW_FIELD_GENEVE_OPT_XXXX
> > + * modification type.
> > + */
> > + struct {
> > + /**
> > + * Geneve option type.
> > + */
> > + uint8_t type;
> > + /**
> > + * Geneve option class.
> > + */
> > + rte_be16_t class_id;
> > + };
> > + };
> > + };
> > + struct rte_flow_item_flex_handle *flex_handle;
> > + };
> > + /** Number of bits to skip from a field. */
> > + uint32_t offset;
> > + };
> > + /**
> > + * Immediate value for RTE_FLOW_FIELD_VALUE, presented in
> the
> > + * same byte order and length as in relevant rte_flow_item_xxx.
> > + * The immediate source bitfield offset is inherited from
> > + * the destination's one.
> > + */
> > + uint8_t value[16];
> > + /**
> > + * Memory address for RTE_FLOW_FIELD_POINTER, memory
> layout
> > + * should be the same as for relevant field in the
> > + * rte_flow_item_xxx structure.
> > + */
> > + void *pvalue;
> > + };
> > +};
> > +
> >
>
> I am aware that you are just moving the above struct, but it is nested too
> much
> which is making it hard to read.
>
> As you are touching it, can we extract some structs and make this struct less
> nested, what do you think?
> Of course it needs to be done in separate patch, as a preperation/clean-up
> patch
> before moving it around.
Agree the struct maybe a bit nested. But not sure how it was discussed before
during the last new member was added... @Ori, Do you have any idea about this?
And if it is really expected, I believe another new thread is worth for that
change, better not be in that series.
Need to discuss the new struct name and other stuff. What do you think?
>
> <...>
>
> > +/**
> > + *
> > + * RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_COMPARE
> > + *
> > + * Matches the packet with compare result.
> > + *
> > + * The operation means a compare with b result.
> > + */
> > +struct rte_flow_item_compare {
> > + enum rte_flow_item_compare_op operation; /* The compare operation.
> */
> > + struct rte_flow_field_data a; /* Field be compared. */
> > + struct rte_flow_field_data b; /* Field as comparator. */
> >
>
> Variable names 'a' and 'b' are not descriptive although it may be OK since
> there is
> no significance to the values, but other option can be 'first' and 'second',
> but
> overall not strong opinion.
Yes, thanks for the suggestion, in fact we also discussed about the name a lot,
finally we choose the widely used 'a' and 'b'
Thanks
